This will be a breakthrough development for the medium format camera market.

Current cameras in this specialized segment all use CCD type sensors. In practice that limits the dynamic range and High ISO capabilities of these cameras, and makes live view operation very difficult. Sensors also tend to heat up during longer exposure times. CMOS technology can solve many of those issues, although it may put some restrictions on lens shift operations.

It will be interesting to see how competition responds, Phase One have in 2013 already hinted (31 minutes into this interview) at their move to CMOS in perhaps the next couple of years. This (Photokina) year will become interesting.

Indeed. Each individual CMOS sensor element consists of a number of 'stacked' layers with transfer gates and transistors that can 'cast shadows'. That also gives rise to what appears to be know as a 'tunneling' effect which benefits perpendicularly incident light.

There are of course practical solutions (microlenses) but they have their acceptance angle limits, and theoretical solutions, including Back-side Illumination (BSI), but I'm not sure that is feasible for such large surfaces as required in this announcement. Etching away the backside of a silicon chip or wafer makes the individual sensor arrays very sensitive to mechanical damage.

Hasselblad announced that the new camera will have a Cmos sensor… They claim improved high ISO and even ….multishot capability! It sounds a bit "MF heresy" to me… Who ever buys MF for high ISO? May they be targeting wedding photographers?

Hasselblad announced that the new camera will have a Cmos sensor… They claim improved high ISO and even ….multishot capability! It sounds a bit "MF heresy" to me… Who ever buys MF for high ISO? May they be targeting wedding photographers?

I'm very happy to see that someone considers those who are neither stationary nor work in studios most of the time! Imagine yourself at the Ponte Vecchio in Florence, Italy at the moments sun is sinking. That is over in all of 10 minutes! As the light changes, theres' so little time to get panoramic pictures and cover the high dynamic range of black waters and burning gold and pink skies. To get overlapping images one has to work fast. So the CMOS sensor is better suited for this than the CCDS. One can bracket and do full coverage. That's the advantage of CMOS. Greater range and versatility. but will they still get the same richness of colors? Well that is magic and mathematics and from my POV, tested by seeing the result.

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.

Dr Larry Hansen, is the man who oversaw the launch of the firm’s first Lunar compact system camera, developed in a tie-up with Sony. That feeds the rumor mill that the new CMOS sensor array might originate from Sony.

Quote:

CCD replaced by CMOS!

It may be some time before the CCDs are dropped. I assume they will co-exist for some time.

I think that the most important news here is that Hasselblad MF division is not dead. Lately, they seemed to have lost ground compared to Phase One, today they prove that they still intend to innovate in MF backs.

Another rumour: it seems that Hasselblad intends to sell a pimped up "full frame" 24x36 body from Sony in A mount as well:

I think that the most important news here is that Hasselblad MF division is not dead. Lately, they seemed to have lost ground compared to Phase One, today they prove that they still intend to innovate in MF backs.

Indeed, it's a promising sign that some competition will exist, and innovation will be the inevitable result.

Quote:

Another rumour: it seems that Hasselblad intends to sell a pimped up "full frame" 24x36 body from Sony in A mount as well:

And since we are speculating, PhaseOne will probably also introduce a CMOS sensor version of their IQ backs, the IQ250:

We often hear that CCD is better than CMOS, albeit at lower ISO settings. Well, is that really true, and on what is that based. The new Phase One CMOS sensor is claimed to have 15 stops of dynamic range. Are there distinct features of CCD that make imaging at low iso superior to working with a CMOS chip, given the same expertise in engineering and programing?

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.

We often hear that CCD is better than CMOS, albeit at lower ISO settings. Well, is that really true, and on what is that based. The new Phase One CMOS sensor is claimed to have 15 stops of dynamic range. Are there distinct features of CCD that make imaging at low iso superior to working with a CMOS chip, given the same expertise in engineering and programing?

Not really, no. For example, Leica replaced the CCD with a CMOS in their M-series and the M9 can be had relatively cheaply second-hand. Apparently, the discerning Leica users dump their CCD based cameras for the sirens of CMOS.

Not really, no. For example, Leica replaced the CCD with a CMOS in their M-series and the M9 can be had relatively cheaply second-hand. Apparently, the discerning Leica users dump their CCD based cameras for the sirens of CMOS.

This is because many leica M users use their cameras for low light street photography Jerome, M9's sensor was a Kodak sensor oriented from cropping it out of an MFDB sensor, hence it was designed having MFDB requirements in mind.

Not really, no. For example, Leica replaced the CCD with a CMOS in their M-series and the M9 can be had relatively cheaply second-hand. Apparently, the discerning Leica users dump their CCD based cameras for the sirens of CMOS.

Jerome,

That makes sense. I imagine that software is one of the main determinants of the final colors as the skin colors adored by Leaf aficionados, (using the same sensors as the Phase One counterparts), have their own processing software and profiles that are especially prized.

But perhaps there were sensitivity gaps in early CMOS sensors over some some significant range that was noticed by fashion photographers. Or, was this superiority, just urban legend?

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.

Our purpose is getting to an impressive photograph. So we encourage browsing and then feedback. Consider a link to your galleries annotated, C&C welcomed. Images posted within OPF are assumed to be for Comment & Critique, unless otherwise designated.